namdhari555 Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 (edited) About Sikhi borrowing from Sanatan traditions in totality, i would ask you one simple question, what in Sikhi is new, something which was not mentioned in earlier sanatan religious texts or oral traditions? I dont know why you keep coming back to this. There is only one Dharm. It doesnt have a name hindu or sikh. Overtime it gets corrupted and avatars, gurus have to come back to re-estamblish it. What sikhs are saying is sikhi is the re-established orginal Dharam not new, because the hindus or some branches have taken the avatars as the True God. They have started to worship them instead of God. Bachittar Natak goes deeply into this, i think maybe that Bani will help to answer your questions. Edited January 27, 2014 by namdhari555 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny101 Posted January 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Sher, very simple way to know the difference between Hinduism and Sikhi is for you to first define Hinduism i.e. beliefs, disbelief, practices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
namdhari555 Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 (edited) so you think only PHs follow Sikhi is some form who were or are subservient to Sikhs at some stage? why it is limited to PHs...SGPC or your fiery katha vachaks or youtube 'intellectuals' (not!) like Sukhpreet Udhoke can answer this. Also, as they are the same, why not stick to the older version? the sanatan version is has something for everyone, much more liberal, much more inclusive, much more ...colourful why do we need Sikhism in the first place? Here is a book that might help you out. Swami Ram Tirath Dandi Sanyasi were a learned Sanskrit Scholar and highly respected Hindu theologian, who later converted to Sikhism in his final years. You can read more about the Mahapurash ji on SikhiWiki: http://www.sikhiwiki...h_Dandi_Sanyasi http://www.scribd.com/doc/67135918/Sarbottam-Dharam-Khalsa-Panth-Swami-Ram-Tirath-Dandi-Sanyasi Edited January 27, 2014 by namdhari555 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amarjeet Singh_1737 Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Sher's kind follow a divergent path where rather than spearheading reform with transparency, they are doing it subtly by claiming 'this is how it was back in the day. We have it right you don't.' What more can we say to the kind who don't have an inkling of what their own scriptures promote? Most Hindus say the Vedas purport laptops, light bulbs, etc; others say something different. Ambedkar got it right when he said that the Hindu faiths despotic achievements can be summed up by the ambiguity rife in it's scriptures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amarjeet Singh_1737 Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Here is a book that might help you out. Swami Ram Tirath Dandi Sanyasi were a learned Sanskrit Scholar and highly respected Hindu theologian, who later converted to Sikhism in his final years. You can read more about the Mahapurash ji on SikhiWiki: http://www.sikhiwiki...h_Dandi_Sanyasi http://www.scribd.com/doc/67135918/Sarbottam-Dharam-Khalsa-Panth-Swami-Ram-Tirath-Dandi-Sanyasi I am sorry he might label this as another Tat Khalsa attempt at destroying Sanataan Sikhism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 source: https://www.facebook.com/Tisarpanth " After having studied the scriptures, in many respects I have discarded the Vedas, Shastras, Smiritis, all Sutras, Tantras and Puranas, knowing them to be polluted and corrupted by many impurities. I have found that only the Holy Guru Granth Sahib is completely free of contamination and knowing it to be benevolent for the whole humanity, I have accepted this scripture and I accept myself to be the Sikh of Guru Nanak Dev, therefore I am a Sikh of the Guru." -Swami Ram Tirath Singh. "Just as the Guru Granth Sahib abated the social injustice, perpetuated against low castes through religious creeds, same way it raised voice in favor of basic rights of the womankind. Here the husband is not said to be the God and the woman the slave or purchased sheep or goat, but (she) has been accepted an equal partner in all (socio-familial) matters. Lopsided dicta of Hindu simirties that vilified women and compelled them to live like captives, was implicitly contravened through Gurus’ Words. Guru Nanak Dev Ji saying that when the whole mankind takes birth from the woman and there is need for woman to perpetuate the life cycle asked, then why the woman is vilified? In the Adi Granth there is no credo regarding barbaric worship neither any importance for ritual feast (to holy quakes) or sacrifices. Similarly no regard is accorded to Vaishnava or goddess worship because in the puranas it is said that they both (Hindu Goddess and Vishnu, one of Hindu god trinity) relish barbarous intakes i.e. meat, alcohol, marijuana, hemp, tobacco, hashish, cannabis etc. In the end I want to mention Guru Granth Sahib’s supremacy from the standpoint that this preeminent Granth does not profess any demigod or goddess to be the real God just as the (Hindu) puranas have done. Each purana’s author has made a God out of his conceptual demigod." -Swami Ram Tirath Singh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amarjeet Singh_1737 Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 I am sorry Neo but this is all Tat Khalsa Karamkand as per Sher's perception unless of course he's willing to change it like his brothers in faith and label it as being 'Khalistani Propaganda.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 If i were a fanatic for the faith i was born , I would have given you 1000 good things about Hinduism. But, fortunately, i am not a fanatic. i am not here to sell Hinduism to Khalsa, sikhs, namdharis, whatevers. if you find Hinduism reprehensible, fine by me. if u think it is bad because it does not have one single book, or one shrine or one God...that's still fine, that's your opinion and, unlike, fanatic, intolerant, supremacist then why i am here, you may ask. valid question. i am here because i am a true Sikh -as in student. I have a very curious mind which wants to learn more and more. i also want to share what i have learnt with others and, this is interesting, correct 1000s of myths which have come to be associated with Sikhism (which has been reduced to Jat owned Khalsaism). so call Hinduism bad, abuse Hindu deities i dont care but DO NOT give me distorted history esp the events from the last three decades. do not try to tell me your version of history is correct because you, a khalsa or pseudo-khalsa, have got some god-given right over truth. Your claim khalsa does not exist in sikh panth are you trying to indirectly tell us sri guru gobind singh ji amrit sanchar in 1699 didn't exist or akali nihangs don't exist? Lot of nanakpanthis goons have no problem with satguru nanak life but when it comes to sri guru gobind singh maharaj they have problem with him-raising shastars, adorned sikhs with full five snatan(eternal) symbols - replace janiu with kirpan as they tended to defend and uphold dharam by uprooted all forms of tyranny- bhramin supermacy all along with mughal opression. Even hindus at my work agree with logical dire need of arrival of khalsa..i went with them one by one- khalsa kakars who they were all eternal, sikhi brings its creation everything together from all yugas all ine one - khalsa in kalyug as it was fully personafied in kalyuga by satguru nanak dev sargun saroop...they have no problem accepting how jaineu is impratical holds no significance when it comes uphold and defending dharma, its only disguisting some of superamstic aryan hindu punjabi scums who have issue with shastars. There is no question about lot of aryan hindu punjabi are intimidated by khalsa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Singh Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) If i were a fanatic for the faith i was born , I would have given you 1000 good things about Hinduism. I can't think of many that other religions don't already claim. Claims to science again like every other religion that claims it- history does show an awfully large level of lack of awareness over it. The invention of surgery by a rishi who worked on dead bodies. I thought touching dead bodies makes a hindu unpure so lower castes got to do that. The invention of aviation technology which was written in books stolen by the british, history of it buried and india's vamanas history. There is a video debunking it, based off a series of analytical discussions on the sources which claim it being modern and the designs of vamanas are not viable enough to fly upwards. The knowledge behind the speed of light, very little evidence exists about it but it seems we don't know in what capacity this would have existed perhaps someone measured it based off a simple experiment and didn't understand or appreciate it's great relevance in quantum physics. The knowledge of mathematics, maths was spread all over the world but with the caste system in place and with yogic and rishi famous trials and tribulations which are alike to cult initiation ceremonies meant it wasn't wide spread and is possible to be speculative based off interpolated books. So much for scientific temper. The world's oldest religion? Hinduism is constantly refined, reabsorbed and changed without a dogmatic spine structure it seems not to have a definition to begin with which allows it to shape shift into anything. It seem religions which were older were observed, if anything Hinduism is probably due to it's boa constrictor feature the world's youngest religion. It shape shifts so much that it's original form is totally lost, movements such as shiv senna have redefined hinduism. People like Ramdev have redefined hinduism things such as using tusli leaves to cure cancer, aids and swine flu (based off the observational evidence it seems not to work yet it is still proselytised) . A religion of gender equality? Based off many goddesses. India's capital Delhi has the highest number of rapes in the world then any other country in the world. The constant books written by foreign women who were sexually harrassed in india seems only to be growing in number. A religion of tolerance? Based off it's teaching of vedas and gita which contradict within the same teachings. Krishna says all paths lead to him, yet he says anyone who changes their religion will end up in hell with the rest of their descendants. India being home to a diverse group of people sure has won the mass hindu support for groups such as shiv senna, rss, bajrang dal, saffron violence hindu right wing groups who might be derived from the aryan samaj who resort to gang violence is really a sign of the tolerant attitudes shown. These groups call Sikhs fanatics and then go around kill people then preaching the killing of a cow or cutting of a dogs tail is a sin yet every other group is below those standards. A religion which teaches humility? Most religions talk about it but again it's actions which count- I don't think sikhs who have been harassed by hindu punjab government officials and police can testify hinduism is a religion of humility. A religion which invent the notion of believer and the malecha or the brahmin and the shudra/valmiki/harijan/chura/chumar/dalit. But please tell me of some of the good qualities of the hindu religion. Edited January 28, 2014 by JatherdarSahib Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny101 Posted January 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 If i were a fanatic for the faith i was born , I would have given you 1000 good things about Hinduism. But, fortunately, i am not a fanatic. i am not here to sell Hinduism to Khalsa, sikhs, namdharis, whatevers. if you find Hinduism reprehensible, fine by me. if u think it is bad because it does not have one single book, or one shrine or one God...that's still fine, that's your opinion and, unlike, fanatic, intolerant, supremacist I never said HInduism is bad or any other religion is bad. neither am I asking for you to tell me 1000 good things about Hinduism. I am only asking you what is Hinduism based on it's beliefs, disbeliefs, practices, rehit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amarjeet Singh_1737 Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 If i were a fanatic for the faith i was born , I would have given you 1000 good things about Hinduism. But, fortunately, i am not a fanatic. i am not here to sell Hinduism to Khalsa, sikhs, namdharis, whatevers. if you find Hinduism reprehensible, fine by me. if u think it is bad because it does not have one single book, or one shrine or one God...that's still fine, that's your opinion and, unlike, fanatic, intolerant, supremacist then why i am here, you may ask. valid question. i am here because i am a true Sikh -as in student. I have a very curious mind which wants to learn more and more. i also want to share what i have learnt with others and, this is interesting, correct 1000s of myths which have come to be associated with Sikhism (which has been reduced to Jat owned Khalsaism). so call Hinduism bad, abuse Hindu deities i dont care but DO NOT give me distorted history esp the events from the last three decades. do not try to tell me your version of history is correct because you, a khalsa or pseudo-khalsa, have got some god-given right over truth. Shut your face you demented form of a sociopath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyhp32 Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Don't let him rile you. It's a common Hindu tactic. He talks of Jat owned Khalsaism. That's a really original argument. Looks like he's been reading Mcleod or something. For someone who comes from a religion where one can worship Amitabh Bachchan as an avtar or worship rats and serve them milk, he will not understand or appreciate the rehat of the Khalsa. For him if Sikhi was a religion containing contradicting teachings then why follow it when you have the uberreligion of contradictions in Hinduism. If Sikhi is about rehat then he will never accept it because his mind is conditioned to accept any anything goes attitude. He has issues with shastars in the Gurdwaras yet will happy accept any number of half naked but armed sadhus as enlightened persons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Singh Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 (edited) Don't let him rile you. It's a common Hindu tactic. He talks of Jat owned Khalsaism. You sure do get that impression when you listen to songs like Jat di akaal followed by insurgents of that period It's troublesome to think things like rats are avtars, if your home gets infested you can't kill them off. Worse yet when you consider a snake the avtar of shiv, what do you do to shiv shankar, bholanath, rudra, - let him bite you and kill your family? Edited January 29, 2014 by JatherdarSahib Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amarjeet Singh_1737 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Tch!Tch! amarjeet, gussa kamjori di nishani hai. Oh and falsifying is not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amarjeet Singh_1737 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 You sure do get that impression when you listen to songs like Jat di akaal followed by insurgents of that period It's troublesome to think things like rats are avtars, if your home gets infested you can't kill them off. Worse yet when you consider a snake the avtar of shiv, what do you do to shiv shankar, bholanath, rudra, - let him bite you and kill your family? In China they eat snake. Full feed for the entire family. Courtesy of your locally owned Bolenath diner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny101 Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) you have rigid notions. mass distortions by the likes of B Vir Singh have created a huge bubble and anyone who is threatened with bursting this comfort zone goes ballistic. you are no exception. Enjoy your Sukhpreet Udhokes and dhadhi jathas, you would not be able to face the true history. Can you give an example of Bhai Vir SIngh Jee's work where they made any distortions? Singhs Sabha was a reaction to attacks on the Sikh faith by Christians and Arya Samajis. Arya Samaj was especially ruthless in their attack. Before Arya Samaj, the Hindus and Sikhs never had any problem with each other. But so misguided were the Punjabi Hindus by this evil movement that they began to make attacks on the Sikh religion by history distortions, accusations and mistrust of the Sikhs. Arya Samaj was created by the British to distort and misguide the Hindu people just as they had created the Ahmadi movement to misguide the Muslims. At atleast the muslims were able to contain Ahmadis and other Hindus(non Punjabis) were able to reject Arya Samaj. But Punjabi Hindus who were not knowledgeable about Vedic studies were easily manipulated by this British created movement and ended up embracing it Edited January 30, 2014 by Jonny101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Please stick to the topic at hand, if you guys wish to discuss bhai vir singh ji in detail, please click on this link below: http://www.sikhawareness.com/index.php/topic/12038-bhai-vir-singhs-editing-of-panth-prakash/page-1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny101 Posted January 31, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 British created Arya Samaj Wah meri bholi (no way!) sarkar "The former S.G.P.C.-elected Jathedar of the Akal Takht, Giani Kirpal Singh and editor of ‘Naveen Panth Prakash’ commented on the advice given him by some modern Sikhs: ‘When I was just transliterating the invocatory verses, then many Sikh gentlemen advised me to: ‘Erase those portions of it, which were against Guru’s thinking and Sikh history and in their place insert your own new verses. Like how, from Rattan Singh Bhangu’s work, ‘Panth Prakash’, Bhai Vir Singh removed some portions. In some places [bhai Vir Singh] changed the wording such as that with regards to the invocation of ‘Chandi’ (NB. Chandi Pooja was carried out by Akali Nihang Guru Gobind Singh before the before creation of the Khalsa), etc., and, replacing the word ‘Sura’ (alcohol) with ‘Suda’ (Ambrosia/Khalsa initiation)’ I did not agree with those gentlemen’s above-said thinking, and I said that to cut out some writers original text and insert in new text of your own is a great injustice with the author and in the literary world is considered a great sin. Yes, regards the text the editor in foot notes can give his own views. ‘Siri Guru Panth Prakash’, editor Giani Kirpal Singh, 1970, Vol.1, Pa.3" That's one example I can understand Sher having a problem with the Sikh poet saint Bhai Sahib Bhai Vir Singh Jee. He being the father of modern Punjabi language, a language that Punjabi Hindus have an allergy to so much so that they disowned it for Hindi a language of the Bhayas and have themselves become honorary Bhayas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amarjeet Singh_1737 Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 you have rigid notions. mass distortions by the likes of B Vir Singh have created a huge bubble and anyone who is threatened with bursting this comfort zone goes ballistic. you are no exception. Enjoy your Sukhpreet Udhokes and dhadhi jathas, you would not be able to face the true history. Throwing a stone in the water will only get your own face wet. Your rigid concepts are purely antagonistic to any authentic notion at hand. Your raves lifted straight from the pages of the RSS, and other terrorists, who support and purport the despotism inscribed and advocated by the Vedas and other so-called scriptures, is a perpetual pain in your rectum. Thus, you have to pursue other unique systems and attempt to absorb them in order to veil your own miserable anachronisms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Enough said on this topic, topic closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts